|
On August 5, 2011, a return to compliance certification, work order for the replaced
<br />diesel leak detector, and an updated monitoring plan was submitted for the violations on
<br />the July 26, 2011, UST inspection report (Attachment 49). A corrective actions
<br />statement was not submitted.
<br />On August 16, 2011, Mr. Cacapit witnessed the successful testing of the replaced diesel
<br />leak detector (Attachment 50).
<br />On September 29, 2011, Mr. Cacapit spoke to Mr. Khajevandi and asked about the
<br />corrective actions statement for the July 26, 2011, UST inspection report. Mr.
<br />Khajevandi stated that he had already submitted the documents, but he would fax them
<br />again.
<br />On October 3, 2011, another copy of the monitoring plan previously submitted on August
<br />5, 2011, was submitted. Mr. Cacapit called Mr. Khajevandi and asked him to submit a
<br />corrective actions statement for the July 26, 2011, UST inspection report. Mr.
<br />Khajevandi stated that he would do it. Later that day, Mr. Khajevandi submitted a work
<br />order that detailed the installation of the diesel leak detector and that water was removed
<br />for the vent sump (Attachment 51).
<br />On May 16, 2012, a monitoring system certification test report for the testing performed
<br />on July 26, 2011, was submitted, eight months late (Attachment 52).
<br />On September 4, 2012, Mr. Cacapit performed a routine UST inspection (Attachment
<br />53). The monitoring system certification, leak detector testing, and spill container testing
<br />were already two months late and had not been scheduled. The 87 -octane slave UST
<br />annular sensor had been in alarm since September 1, 2011, and no actions have been
<br />taken to address the alarm. Current financial responsibility documents have not been
<br />submitted to the EHD, the designated operator failed to attach the alarm history to two of
<br />the monthly inspection reports, and the only employee on site, Ms. Amrit Gill, was not
<br />trained by the designated operator. Ms. Gill stated that Mr. Khajevandi no longer worked
<br />there.
<br />On September 28, 2012, Mr. Cacapit witnessed the monitoring system certification, leak
<br />detector testing, and spill container testing. The diesel UST annular sensor, 87 -octane
<br />leak detector, and the 91 -octane spill container failed when tested. Diesel was found
<br />leaking from the filters at dispensers 5/6 and 9/10. Approximately a pint of diesel was
<br />found in UDC sump 5/6. During a review of the facility's paperwork, Mr. Cacapit found
<br />that the facility completed an In Station Diagnostic (ISD) upgrade on August 3, 2012,
<br />which requires a reprogramming of the monitoring panel, without a permit from the EHD.
<br />Maintenance and monitoring records for an alarm on September 3, 2012, were not found
<br />on site, and the only employee on site, Mr. Harnek Singh, was not trained by the
<br />designated operator. An inspection report was left on site (Attachment 54).
<br />On November 7, 2012, Mr. Cacapit called Ms. Amiri and Mr. Sam Singh, District
<br />Manager, and left each a message asking them to call back regarding the two
<br />September inspections. Mr. Cacapit sent a follow up letter to the September 4, 2012,
<br />and September 28, 2012, UST inspections (Attachment 55).
<br />1.1
<br />
|